AMID all the hullabaloo about the new Grand Lucayan deal – which is very worthy of the attention that surrounds it, make no mistake – some words from former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham may have been overlooked.

Mr Ingraham was speaking about the discriminatory citizenship laws in our country that continue to persist.

Three years ago, he said he expected the Davis administration to change the laws on citizenship to ensure equality, as well as to criminalise marital rape. Neither of those measures have come to pass, nor are they looking likely to do so any time soon.

But one particular phrase stood out as Mr Ingraham spoke last week on the issue again.

He said: “The government has its own priorities, and there has been no public pressure of consequence to cause the government to move in one direction or the other.”

Focus on those words “no public pressure of consequence” for a moment.

There certainly has been some public pressure. When asked soon after coming to power whether marital rape laws were something on the new administration’s agenda, Prime Minister Philip Davis suggested not – and that prompted enough of a backlash to lead to some mollifying noises from the administration, but not enough to actually lead to the legislation finding its way onto the to-do list.

There was commentary from senior figures – including the prime minister’s wife, Ann Marie Davis, who has said repeatedly that she supports criminalising marital rape and that the government should move forward with legislation on the matter.

Activists have spoken out on a number of occasions, columnists have written about the matter in this very newspaper, there has been international attention to see what steps we have taken to live up to previous promises, and so on.

But the words “of consequence” are the ones that linger here. For all the above pressure, how much of that is going to cost this administration an election? Where is the broad-based public push to ensure that women have exactly the same rights as men when it comes to citizenship, and that married women have the same protections as unmarried women when it comes to being raped by their partner?

That is the substance of the matter.

Mr Ingraham went on to say: “The women of The Bahamas have not stepped up to the plate, as educated as y’all are, and said we demand our equal rights. No, they haven’t done so, and clearly the men who are in politics are not gonna go out of their way to have you all who are better educated than we are, more prepared than we are, but of course we have this dominant role in public life, so why do you expect these men, unless you push them, to change?”

Ironically enough, there is some movement on erasing inequality… for men.

The Privy Council ruled in 2023 that people born out of wedlock to Bahamian men are Bahamians at birth regardless of their mother’s nationality.

After that ruling, it was expected that further inequalities would be looked at – but the absence of action has been notable.

As it stands, children born outside the country to a Bahamian woman and a foreign man are not automatically granted Bahamian citizenship, and Bahamian women also lack the same rights as men in securing citizenship for a foreign spouse.

We are, of course, on the countdown to an election – albeit one where we do not as yet know what the date will be. Certainly, moves are in place to select candidates and start campaigning.

Will inequality be a matter “of consequence” to the electorate in the next vote? Will Bahamian women – and men alongside them – demand whoever is in government next had better make sure everyone is equal at last? Or is it an issue that will remain down the list behind how much money is in your pocket and how many crimes are taking place?

There will be plenty who might criticise Mr Ingraham for blaming women for not having “stepped up to the plate” – but the only way to prove him wrong is to ensure this issue has consequences. It has to matter, and that is the only way things will change.